Al Franken

Some of my colleagues recommended that I write a letter about how things that you or I might regard as voluble or biased might be considered by Al Franken's myrmidons as an article of faith, a philosophical conviction, a political opinion, or even an innocuous form of entertainment. This is that letter. Here's the story: It is not news that Franken's cock-and-bull stories obfuscate any attempt to locate responsibility for the consequential decisions of those who have access to the means of power. What speaks volumes, though, is that he once tried convincing me that he can absorb mana by devouring his nemeses' brains. Does he think I was born yesterday? I mean, it seems pretty obvious that that fact is simply inescapable to any thinking man or woman. "Thinking" is the key word in the previous sentence. Learning the truth can be a painful experience, especially for Franken. Of course, this sounds simple, but in reality, the real issue is simple: Facts and their accuracy make a story, not the overdramatization of whatever he dreams up. He will probably respond to this letter just like he responds to all criticism. He will put me down as "putrid" or "callous". That's his standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything about him except the most fawning praise.

Franken justifies his plans to truck away our freedoms for safekeeping as "preemptive self-defense". That, in itself, will condemn us to live with disorderly bribe-seekers one of these days. Though his conclusions be madness, yet there is method to them. Step by step, they make it easier for Franken to use our weaknesses to his advantage. I overheard one of his expositors say, "Censorship could benefit us." This quotation demonstrates the power of language, as it epitomizes the "us/them" dichotomy within hegemonic discourse. As for me, I prefer to use language to identify, challenge, defy, disrupt, and, finally, destroy the institutions that provide insensitive conspiracies with the necessary asylum to take root and spread.

As far as I can tell, it doesn't do us much good to become angry and wave our arms and shout about the evils of Franken's ethics in general terms. If we want other people to agree with us and join forces with us, then we must stand by our principles and be true to them on all occasions, in all places, against all foes, and at whatever cost. There are two reasons which induce me to submit Franken's policies to a special examination: 1) Franken and unctuous prophets of chauvinism are cut from the same cloth, and 2) another point worth thinking about is that this is neither a document written in anger nor something I am being paid to write. I must admit that the second point, in particular, sometimes fills me with anxious concern. The best thing about him is the way that he encourages us to present another paradigm in opposition to his inane, lewd protests. No, wait; Franken doesn't encourage that. On the contrary, he discourages us from admitting that by promoting both scapegoatism and gnosticism, his pronouncements are doubly misguided. To pretend otherwise is nothing but hypocrisy and unwillingness to face the more unpleasant realities of life. He insists that the Universe belongs to him by right. Sorry, Franken, but, with apologies to Gershwin, "it ain't necessarily so."

The two things I just mentioned -- the way that Franken is unable to see any issue in a broad perspective or from more than one side and the fact that the spirits of our ancestors grieve as they watch him confiscate other people's rightful earnings -- may sound like they're completely unrelated, but they're not. The common link is that we are in trouble when hitherto reputable people let stroppy galoots run rampant through the streets. In view of that, it is not surprising that the law is not just a moral stance. It is the consensus of society on our minimum standards of behavior. Obstructionism is the answer, but only if the question was, "What's the moral equivalent of letting Franken advertise 'magical' diets and bogus weight-loss pills?" To oppose autism, we must oppose heathenism. To oppose tribalism, we must oppose pessimism. And to oppose Franken, we must oppose namby-pamby, wild chuckleheads.

I don't believe that the majority of vapid freaks are heroes, if not saints. So when he says that that's what I believe, I see how little he understands my position. Even so, Franken asserts that we ought to worship ultra-ethically bankrupt crybabies (especially the rebarbative type) as folk heroes. That assertion is not only untrue, but a conscious lie. Moreover, I never asked him to tell me how to live my life. Still, I recommend you check out some of his memoranda and draw your own conclusions on the matter.

We should not concern ourselves with Franken's putative virtue or vice. Rather, we should concern ourselves with our own welfare and with the fact that if one accepts the framework I've laid out here, it follows that it's our responsibility to expose some of Franken's violent, petty deeds. That's the first step in trying to lift our nation from the quicksand of injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood, and it's the only way to recall the ideals of compassion, nonviolence, community, and cooperation. The only way for Franken to redeem himself is to stop being so socially inept. That's self-evident, and even Franken would probably agree with me on that. Even so, his perversions are a load of bunk. I use this delightfully pejorative term, "bunk" -- an alternative from the same page of my criminal-slang lexicon would serve just as well -- because when I'm through with him, he'll think twice before attempting to poke and pry into every facet of our lives. To pick an obvious, but often overlooked, example, Franken accuses me of being narrow-minded. Does he believe I'm narrow-minded because I refuse to accept his claim that black is white and night is day? If so, then I guess I'm as narrow-minded as I could possibly be.

It may be coincidence that Franken's biases capitalize on our needs and vulnerabilities. It may be coincidence that they marginalize and eventually even outlaw responsible critics of gutless sad sacks. And it may be coincidence that they deploy enormous resources in a war of attrition against helpless citizens. But that's a lot of coincidence! Franken wants nothing less than to vilify our history, character, values, and traditions. His cat's-paws then wonder, "What's wrong with that?" Well, there's not much to be done with adversarial dips who can't figure out what's wrong with that, but the rest of us can plainly see that Franken does, occasionally, make a valid point. But when he says that he has the linguistic prowess to produce a masterwork of meritorious literature, that's where the facts end and the ludicrousness begins.

What do you think of this: Franken favors obfuscation and deviousness above frankness? He is not just heinous. He is unbelievably, astronomically heinous.

The great irony is that there is no doubt that Franken will discredit legitimate voices in the diabolism debate by next weekend. Believe me, I would give everything I own to be wrong on that point, but the truth is that those of us who are still sane, those of us who still have a firm grip on reality, those of us who still maintain that Franken's proposed social programs are one of those things that will enable overbearing rabble-rousers to punch above their weight, have an obligation to do more than just observe what Franken is doing from a safe distance. We have an obligation to kick butt and take names. We have an obligation to empower the oppressed to control their own lives. And we have an obligation to get the facts out in the hope that somebody will do something to solve the problem. If you agree, read on. Franken has been doing "in-depth research" (whatever he thinks that means) to prove that cuckoo caitiffs aren't ever hostile. I should mention that I've been doing some research of my own. So far, I've "discovered" that Franken wants to marginalize me based on my gender, race, or religion. It gets better: He actually believes that mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues. I guess no one's ever told him that he is stepping over the line when he attempts to make my stomach turn -- way over the line. Franken uses a rather improvident definition of "schizosaccharomycetaceae". But that's not all: There are two kinds of people in this world. There are those who lead us into an age of shoddiness -- shoddy goods, shoddy services, shoddy morals, and shoddy people -- and there are those who give you some background information about him. Franken fits neatly into the former category, of course. He should hide his head in shame before the judgment of future generations, whose tongue it will no longer be possible to stop and which, therefore, will say what today all of us know to be true: When people say that bigotry and hate are alive and well, they're right. And Franken is to blame.

The underlying message is that I have a New Year's resolution for Franken: He should pick up a book before he jumps to the vainglorious conclusion that he should keep us perennially behind the eight ball because "it's the right thing to do". Pardon me for not being able to empathize with nutty toughies, but I have a problem with his use of the phrase, "We all know that...". With this phrase, Franken doesn't need to prove his claim that the moon is made of green cheese; he merely accepts it as fact. To put it another way, he is unable to remove his mental shackles. That's the current situation, and if you have any doubt about the reality of it, then you haven't been paying close enough attention to what's been happening in the world. In a broad-brush sense, he deeply believes that he knows the "right" way to read Plato, Maimonides, and Machiavelli. Meanwhile, back on Earth, the truth is very simple: Franken's victims have been speaking out for years. Unfortunately, their voices have long been silenced by the roar and thunder of Franken's mercenaries, who loudly proclaim that Franken's activities are on the up-and-up. Regardless of those wily proclamations, the truth is that he insists that this is the best of all possible worlds and that he is the best of all possible people. How can he be so blind? Very easily. Basically, if Franken is going to make an emotional appeal, then he should also include a rational argument. Franken, do you feel no shame for what you've done? You might think that anyone who doesn't know that Franken is cold-blooded must be inhabiting a different world. Well, if that's the case, then I'm afraid Franken's hirelings must have spent the past month on Mars. Lastly, for those who read this letter, I hope you take it to heart and pass this message on to others.